Culture eats Principles for breakfast Jonathan Smart @jonsmart Ian Dugmore @iandugmore
In the beginning some people had a great idea
In the beginning some people had a great idea And the customers were delighted
In the beginning some people had a great idea The founders decided to expand and the Small Company became a Large Company
In the beginning some people had a great idea And then Frederick Winslow Taylor came along and said “let there be Scientific Management” and so there was and there was and there was and there was and there still is
In the beginning some people had a great idea And then someone made a mistake and a Manager said “let there be standards” and so there was Governance and Standards and a culture of Control > Trust
In the beginning some people had a great idea And then the Audit department said “here are some audit points” and then there were more Standards and more Standards and more Standards and more Standards
In the beginning some people had a great idea And then a Manager said “let’s adopt ITIL” Change Advisory Board once every 2 weeks ‘advising’?
In the beginning some people had a great idea And then central PMO said “we need consistent standards to keep the Regulators happy” change lifecycle, 7 gates 100 question questionnaire x 7 change prevention control process more PMO & Control staff
In the beginning some people had a great idea And then a Manager said “move part (not all) of the Value Chain to a cheaper location” and it was done and then the firm hired more BAs and PMs
In the beginning some people had a great idea And then someone said “this is not working, I want you to spend more money on better plans and more detailed up front analysis, and the date had better not move or else” And so they did
In the beginning some people had a great idea And a Project Manager said “the releases are too troublesome, so we will release less frequently” And so they moved from monthly releases to quarterly releases
In the beginning some people had a great idea And then someone asked “Why are we all working like this?”, everyone answered <shrug> “because it’s how we do things around here” </shrug>
Sound familiar?
CULTURE is huge
Aiki is to pull when you are pushed to push when you are pulled It is the spirit of slowness and speed of harmonizing your movement with your opponent
Blending not clashing Leading the assailant Use of Internal Strength
One Size Does Not Fit All Blending not Clashing
Scaling Don’t scale agile : Descale the work first Breadth, Diversity, Complexity Shu Ha Ri Product : Team 1:1 1:M M:M M:1 Team, Initiative, Dept, Group, Firm, Organisation Blending not Clashing
Practices = Principles ( Organisational Context, Team Context, Culture, Shu Ha Ri, Customer ); Blending not Clashing
3 Common Scaling Frameworks Disciplined Agile SAFe LeSS DA is our overarching approach as a goal based framework Not mutually exclusive Blending not Clashing
One Size Does Fit All Blending not Clashing
Why Principles Change Lifecycle Roles Measures Blending not Clashing
Blending not clashing Leading the assailant Use of Internal Strength
Lead the business Leading the Assailant
Lead management Management love targets But targets are bad for teams, right? Leading the Assailant
Targets can be good If they fit your culture If they are used carefully! Leading the Assailant
Carefully Management Teams Leading the Assailant
Carefully Leading the Assailant
Carefully Leading the Assailant
Carefully Leading the Assailant
Carefully Set by Self Managers Assessment Targets Measures Management Teams Leading the Assailant
Carefully Leading the Assailant
Carefully Protect Top Only Teams Set by Self Managers Assessment Targets Measures Management Teams Leading the Assailant
Carefully Leading the Assailant
Carefully Remove Implement Impediments Principles Protect Top Only Teams Set by Self Managers Assessment Targets Measures Management Teams Leading the Assailant
Implement Principles Practices = Principles(Context) Practices Context Principles Leading the Assailant
Some practices are always a good thing Leading the Assailant
Agility Level Agility Level Description Agility Criteria Level 1 Mobilising Largely Cross functional Team … Level 2 Transitioning Daily Coordination Meeting Regular Show and Tell … Level 3 Established WIP limited Lead Time < 8 weeks … Level 4 Optimising Teams optimising their practices Lead Time < 4 weeks … Leading the Assailant
...allows us to forecast Agility 1 & 2 Agility 3 & 4 Leading the Assailant
To increase agility... avoid agile islands ecosystem has to support Leading the Assailant
To increase agility... move from annual to rolling wave budgeting Leading the Assailant
To increase agility... improve collaboration tools and working environment Leading the Assailant
To increase agility... change governance and controls Leading the Assailant
To increase agility... move from Project to Product Leading the Assailant
To increase agility... feature teams Leading the Assailant
To increase agility... agile architecture Leading the Assailant
To increase agility... DevOps-ification Leading the Assailant
Blending not clashing Leading the assailant Use of Internal Strength
Top down and bottom up Use of Internal Strength
Agile Community of Practice Use of Internal Strength
Identify Natural Champions Use of Internal Strength
Training and coaching, at scale Use of Internal Strength
To summarise...
Aiki Blending not clashing One size does not fit all Leading the assailant Agility Levels Use of Internal Strength Champions
Where are we 1 year into the journey?
From 4% to over 40% of teams agile
Over 50% of strategic apps adding value at least monthly
Higher Quality Agility Level positively correlated to fewer Incidents
would you recommend agile to a colleague?
Still lots to do
@jonsmart @iandugmore Thank you
Recommend
More recommend
